Lee Tamer

Here's a very rough light test i did by just blocking out the windows with trashbags Even with a DSLR i had to shoot on a high ISO, 1200, to get a decent exposure. i think I'll need some type of light coming from the sink windows so I dont have to have such a high iso setting

I think I'm going to go ahead and do night for night. Shooting during the day just seems to get more and more tedious as I look into it. With shooting at night I wont have to worry about the sliding glass door either, which seems like it could be extremely problematic in going from wide to close up. I think Im going to use the kitchen table practical and the stove practical. Shine an blue gelled HMI through the windows above the sink. Any other suggestions? Also Mr. David Mullen, i just picked up Kris Malkiweicz's updated Film Lighting book, I dont know how much you had to do with it but I saw some interviews with you in it. Great, informative book!

If I wanted to use the florescent fixture above the island in addition to the two practical lights, would it be better to use correction gels on the practical lights or gels on the florescent fixture, since it wont be in the shot. I'm assuming gel the florescent? Would I want to use the florescent fixture at all?

I was also thinking an HMI through the windows for a moonlight effect. Or would that look too artificial during the day?

Should I use blue color gels in front of the two windows if I wanted them in the shot? Should I place ND filters and blue gels on the windows or just blue gels?

Here's my location. One actor will be standing in front of the table. The other actor will be standing next to the kitchen island. I plan to keep the lighting simple. Im hoping to get away with only using the light above the table (raising it up higher) and using the light above the kitchen stove. There is a florescent light fixture above the island but I dont want to use it at all because of the mixture of lights. The fixture is turned on in the picture. I plan on blocking off the screen door and the two windows. There is also a large window coming from the dining room which I will block off. Could I get away with only using these two lights?

I absolutely love this look. Is it with a gelled light shining through the window?

No its an interior night scene, i was confused by the meaning of Day for Night

Ah ok, I thought shooting a night scene during the day meant "day for night". Thanks for the tips, I think I have a general idea of where I want to go

Will it look obvious that its daytime no matter what I try? Im sure there are ways to pull it off

Im shooting a student film on a tight schedule. The next scene is a dialogue heavy scene that takes place in a kitchen at night. Since the film is on a tight schedule should I just shoot "day for night" or try to get the scene shot at night? What would be easier? I know films with bigger budgets often shoot "day for night" on a sound stage. Any advice?

Simple question, is there any way to do this? I'm using Adobe Premiere CS 5

I think what happened is for the first shot is it was set for tungsten when there were flourescent fixtures in the background. The shot originally had a green tint to it thats why I'm thinking it was that.

The setting is supposed to be at night. I know the main reason for the shadows is the position of the actors but I'm fine with it.

Also does the shadow on the woman's neck bother anyone?

Thanks for the comments everyone. I guess i'm just being too nit picky about the scene. This is for my senior thesis film so i'm being a bit of a perfectionist about it

Here is the reverse shot, just for comparison. One with the light One without And the color isn't exact, white balance was tricky

I should mention this was shot on a DSLR using only the lighting in the building, which i had no control over.

Sorry if this is in the wrong forum I wasn't sure where it would fit. What's bugging me is the light on the left of the frame in the first image. Which of these shots works better? Is the light a big problem? I'm wondering if it would be too much of a distraction. Does it bother anyone?

The January 2012 issue of American Cinematographer has "Dragon Tattoo" as its cover story. All it says is that Fincher decided to use Cronenweth after a couple weeks. It doesnt give a reason why

Im shooting a scene in a lobby/hallway of an office building that lit by fluorescent lights. The scene calls for some tracking shots of the actors. The shot tracks the actor as he meets up with a woman walking towards him. I have no idea how to go about lighting this scene without the lights/crew being in the shot. Any advice on this?

As of right now I do have an assistant director to help out. I think i'll direct/shoot it right now and if it gets to be too much work I'll get someone else to direct it.

A script I'm shooting requires several scenes to be shot in a grave yard with a name visible on the head stone. How on earth do I put names on a headstone? Do I buy a real headstone? Im totally stuck at this point.

This is a video my college class did for Hope Well Cancer Support. We were hired to do the "teen circle" support group. I was the director of photography on it. It was shot on the Canon 60D and the Canon 7D. http://vimeo.com/33800511 Thoughts?

See I personally feel that even if I get a DP there really won't be any point in having him/her there other than to watch the monitor, because I would probably end up doing the bulk of the work. Since its only a short film, I feel that if I directed and shot the film, things would get done quicker